Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30136025›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019

Approaches to decision-making among late-stage melanoma patients: a multifactorial investigation.

Sarah B Garrett, Corey M Abramson, Katharine A Rendle, Daniel Dohan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sarah B GarrettPhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California Street, Suite 265, San Francisco, CA, 94118, USA. Sarah.Garrett@ucsf.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3238-5692
Corey M AbramsonSchool of Sociology, Cancer Prevention and Control Group, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Katharine A RendleDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Daniel DohanPhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California Street, Suite 265, San Francisco, CA, 94118, USA.

Funding

Before Consent: Cancer Patients' Deliberations about Early Phase Clinical TrialsR01CA152195 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI DOHAN, DANIEL P. · 2010 to 2014
$2.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA152195Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute ME-1409-22996
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe treatment decisions of melanoma patients are poorly understood. Most research on cancer patient decision-making focuses on limited components of specific treatment decisions. This study aimed to holistically characterize late-stage melanoma patients' approaches to treatment decision-making in order to advance understanding of patient influences and supports.

methods(1) Exploratory analysis of longitudinal qualitative data to identify themes that characterize patient decision-making. (2) Pattern analysis of decision-making themes using an innovative method for visualizing qualitative data: a hierarchically-clustered heatmap. Participants were 13 advanced melanoma patients at a large academic medical center.

resultsExploratory analysis revealed eight themes. Heatmap analysis indicated two broad types of patient decision-makers. "Reliant outsiders" relied on providers for medical information, demonstrated low involvement in decision-making, showed a low or later-in-care interest in clinical trials, and expressed altruistic motives. "Active insiders" accessed substantial medical information and expertise in their networks, consulted with other doctors, showed early and substantial interest in trials, demonstrated high involvement in decision-making, and employed multiple decision-making strategies.

conclusionWe identified and characterized two distinct approaches to decision-making among patients with late-stage melanoma. These differences spanned a wide range of factors (e.g., behaviors, resources, motivations). Enhanced understanding of patients as decision-makers and the factors that shape their decision-making may help providers to better support patient understanding, improve patient-provider communication, and support shared decision-making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAdultAgedClinical Trials as TopicCommunicationData CollectionFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMelanomaMiddle AgedMotivationPhysiciansQualitative ResearchDecision makingEthnoarray approachEthnographyMelanoma

Identifiers

PMID30136025
PMCPMC6373271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.